The crimes cited by Inman Grant were ideologically-driven massacres performed for online audiences. Telegram channels established after these and other hate-fueled crimes were populated by users who endorsed the killers and shared videos and other content from the massacres. Telegram had “become more compliant initially with us and with other regulators after France took action against the company,” Inman Grant said. The Australian court case also related to IS beheadings and other “horrific material used for propaganda and for radicalization,” she said. “When platforms are alerted to terrorist content, they must act,” Inman Grant said.